Re: Stinger Specs

[ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)]

Steve Schear wrote:
> 
> >Stinger (AIM-92)  (Jane's #: 6604.331)
> >152 x 7-14 cm  (l x d - span)
> >Weight: 18 kg
> >Warhead: HE
> >Propulsion: Solid
> >Range: 2-4 km
> >Guidance: IR
> >
> >Exact effective range / altitude is not listed in the quick guide I have
> >on my desk.  I will pull it out of a larger volume when I have time.
> >
> 
> When I was doing my undergraduate work several of us built a heat-seeking
> and homing circuit which we subsequently tested in a small (24-inch) solid
> propellent rocket.  Four CO-2 cooled germanium sensors picked up radiation
> from a small flat-topped piramidal mirror which drove fin servos to 'null'
> onto (place its image atop the piramid) the heat source. One evening we
> were able to 'shoot down' a lit cigarette tied to fence up in the hills
> near the college from a distance of about 1/4-mile.
> 
> For some time we considered making available 'Visible Missile" plans/kits,
> for a  few hundred dollars, which had everything except the easily obtained
> zinc-sulphur propellent (would this be illegal given the laws passed since
> the '70s?) so those interested in IR missile technology could learn from a
> functioning testbed.  I did quite a bit of serious amateur rocketry in my

very interesting.

how to make this propellent?

and why it was banned?

thanks!

death to zealous "child protectors".

> teen years through the Northrup Rocketry Club (So. Cal) and launches at a
> site near Edwards AFB (they were happy to track our launches and make sure
> there was no aircraft hazzard). Our 24-inch rockets reached speeds of over
> 1000 mph in about 1 second and altitudes of about 10,000 ft.  48-inch

khm, it means that the acceleration was 45g. it is a lot, how come
the rockets did not break apart? what were the rocket bodies made
from?

> rockets (still small enough for shoulder launch) could reach over Mach 2
> and altitude/ranges of about 50,000 ft (all figures insignificant
> payloads).

> I'm certain I and many of my friends got much of our interest for math and
> science and subsequent academic success from such hands-on activities which
> were encouraged or supported by teachers, parents, corporations and the
> government.  We were forced to solve real chemistry, math, engineering,
> physics and material science problems.  This has all vanished is our zeal
> to protect youth and society from any activity which might lead injury or
> misuse.  I can't even find a place to buy a niece a real chemistry set as
> tort laws have forced them from the market.  When considering the plumeting
> interest and achievement of our youth in math and science we look nor
> further for a reason.

of course, protection leads to stupidification.

is this rocketry club still operational?

	- Igor.